i am the stupidest person alive. on the cover, it reads: "a cobbled court novel" which somehow interpreted as "a law/murder novel that involves quiltii am the stupidest person alive. on the cover, it reads: "a cobbled court novel" which somehow interpreted as "a law/murder novel that involves quilting".

i was maybe 60 pages in or so when i realized my mistake.

i was maybe 100 pages in when i realized the only discernible plot was something to do with a 22 year old with marriage and mommy issues getting proposed to on new year's eve and not knowing what to do with it.

but i could also just tell you that ed is a star CO-captain of the basketball team who likes generic poi can tell you EXACTLY why ed and min broke up.

but i could also just tell you that ed is a star CO-captain of the basketball team who likes generic popular music and bad beer and min is a nice jewish girl who loves old movies, fine liqueur, and ironic holidays and you could probably make a safe enough prediction on your own.

look, i'm all for star-crossed teenaged love and whatnot but i hate a cheesy gimmick. and this book is one giant gimmick.

it's "Thirteen Reasons Why" without the suicide.

rather than struggle with difficult emotional content, it has cartoony pictures. because soured love is like a bad gouache painting. that much they got right.

"why we broke up" starts with a thunk. a box of relationship shrapnel thrown symbolically on the frontstep of the heartbroken ex-hero of min's ex-dreams.

the novel's biggest problem, aside from its characters' inability to emotionally connect with its premise, is that its lead isn't particularly likable.

min is precocious. she's obsessed with pretentious old films and oscillates between being described as "arty" and "different."

i really didn't like her.

she's oblivious - she misses the fact that her BFF is totes in love with her, a fact not lost on her otherwise oblivious but still oh so amazing new boyfriend ed.

can we just agree that if any normal woman was going to write a several hundred paged opus to our exboyfriends about why we hate them so much now that we would try to fit our characterization as "smart" or "arty" or "different" and not use the phrase "and whatnot" even ironically?

can we please just all agree on that?

and, yes, i realize that i've already used it in this review, but, can we all just acknowledge that perhaps i really understand irony and was doing it to make a point?

thanks.

she also describes her heartache in grandiose poetic terms that feel so entirely disingenuous they're laughable. shit like "this was the snowflake on the frozen eyelid of a frost giant whose broken heart left ice shards of pain that pierced the soul of the rose that was our love". i'm being hyperbolic here for dramatic purpose. but you get the point.

also, the things min keeps in her tragic reliquary of her unanointed love are just...weird. there, i said it. a towel from the time ed's broken sister made onion rings for her jerk brother and then kicked min out so that joan could have a serious talk about the relationship she didn't approve of for whatever reason? ok. that box must smell good. some things i got. like ticket stubs or letters. but condom wrappers? that's just gross.

although, i suppose less gross than keeping the condom, if i want to be fair about it.

look, min is naive and romantic and living in a world where she is the director of her own life. again, it's like madame bovary, without the suicide.

and ed...ed is a teenaged boy. like most pubescent boys of the athletic persuasion, he dabbles in homophobia. he also abuses the phrase "no offense" and has terrible taste in jewelry. that's probably the most authentic feeling stuff in the whole book.

there's a whole subplot with ed's exes (of which, well, there are many). but here's a general good rule of thumb that predominantly applies to murder mysteries but certainly can be applied in other genres as well: if someone is generally "too helpful" - by which i mean they seem overly nice or generous with time, sympathy, advice, or help - they're trouble.

someone who watches as many old movies as min purports to would DEFINITELY be aware of that trope.

just sayin'.

two stars - it wasn't life-changing or emotionally effective, more cutesy and gimmicky. no one is particularly likable, but mostly because they're too static to really explode into anything other than the realm of the blah.

my rating is based on using this as an educational resource, not for its lone merits as an engaging graphic novel. if i were still teaching the odyssemy rating is based on using this as an educational resource, not for its lone merits as an engaging graphic novel. if i were still teaching the odyssey, i would want this edition on hand for students who have trouble slogging through the lengthy passages and need a little bit more visual assistance to work their ways through the murkier parts of the text. it's pretty awesome, in that regards....more